THE BATTLE
OF BLOREHEATH
GO —
DA
250
T84-
FRANCIS RANDLE TWEMLOW,
D S.O., F.S.A., M.A.
BY THE SAME AUTHOR.
THE TWEMLOWS:
THEIR WIVES AND THEIR HOMES.
270 pp. 39 Illustrations. Med. 410. Limited Edition.
Two GUINEAS NET, POST FREE.
Wolverhampton :
WHITEHEAD BROS., St. foAn's Square.
THE BATTLE
OF BLOREHEATH
BY
FRANCIS RANDLE TWEMLOW,
D.S.O., F.S.A., M.A.,
OF PEATSWOOD, CO. STAFFORD.
1912. - i \o "
* 0
WOLVERHAMPTON :
WHITEHEAD BROS., PRINTERS, ST. JOHN'S SQUARE.
IV.
OR
3.SO
DEDICATION.
To Colonel SIR PHILIP WALHOUSE
CHETWODE, Baronet, D.S.O., of Oakley
co. Stafford, and Chetwode co. Bucks., late
commanding the igth (Queen Alexandra's
Own Royal) Hussars, the present owner of
the historic soil of Bloreheath, this Book is
dedicated.
V.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTORY. PREVIOUS ACCOUNTS OF THE BATTLE.
OBJECT OF THE PRESENT BOOK. AUTHORITIES.
Chapter I. Audley's Cross.
„ II. Summary of events between 1422 and 1459.
,, III. Salisbury and his Army.
,, IV. Audley and his Army.
„ V. The Ground.
,, VI. Arms, Tactics, and Generalship.
„ VII. The Fighting.
,, VIII. Dangerous situation of the Victors.
IX. Salisbury Hill.
,, X. Queen Margaret at Mucclestone.
„ XI. Events after the battle. The Rout of Ludford.
The fate of the Leaders on both sides.
„ XII. Was the battle savage and fratricidal ?
Appendix A. The chronicle of William Gregory.
„ B. The chronicle of Jehan de Waurin.
„ C. The course of the old road from Newcastle to
Market Drayton.
,, D. The living descendants of the chief combatants.
PLANS.
Chapter I. i. The Parish of Tyrley, co. Stafford, 1912.
„ V. 2. Tyrley Manor in the Fifteenth century.
V. 3. The Battlefield of Bloreheath.
VI.
AUTHORITIES.
PRINTED BOOKS.
Hall, folio //j. Hollinshed) folio 649. Grafton,
Baker, folio 195. Stow, folio 405. Leland's Itinerary,
vol. VII, folio 32. Parliamentary Rolls, 38, Hen. VI.
(1459) v°l- v^ 348, 369 >
Dugdale's Baronage. Ormerods History of Cheshire.
Blakeway's Sheriffs of Shropshire.
W. Gregory's Chronicle (quoted in Appendix A).
Jehan de Wauriris Chronicle (quoted in Appendix B).
Canon Morris in his History of Chester, in Plantagenet
times, gives a few particulars not found elsewhere. And
to these must be lidded Eytoris History of Shropshire,
the Publications of the William Salt Society at Stafford,
and Mr. Duignaris Staffordshire place names.
MANUSCRIPTS.
Inquests post mortem, and other documents relating to
Tyrley and its lords, at the Public Record Office.
Charters, Court Rolls, Maps, &c. belonging to the
author ; and also to Sir P. W. Chetwode Bart., at
Oakley, near Market Drayton ; Mr. J. L. Broughton,
at Tunstall Hall, Market Drayton; Mr. H. E.
Wilbraham, at Delamere House, Northwich ; the late
Rev. Sir George Boughey Bart., at Aqualate, Newport,
Salop. To all these gentlemen, and also to Mrs.
Broughton, of Tunstall Hall, Market Drayton, and to
Mr. Meadows, of Oakley, and to Professor C. W. Oman,
of All Souls' College, Oxford, the author is much
indebted for their kind assistance.
Vll.
INTRODUCTORY.
Previous Accounts. During the nineteenth century various
accounts of this battle were written, the four following authors
being perhaps the best known: —
1. REV. W. SNAPE, Curate of Keele and Maer, who wrote
in the " Gentleman's Magazine " of December 1812,
and whose article is quoted in " Pitt's " History of
Staffordshire " (published in 1817), p. 329.
2. MR. W. BEAMONT, who read a paper before the Chester
Archaeological Society in 1850.
3. MR. RICHARD BROOKE, F.S.A., who read a paper before
the Society of Antiquaries of London in December,
1853; and published it, along with accounts of other
battles, in 1857.
4. PROFESSOR CHARLES W. OMAN, F.S.A., Fellow of All
Souls' College, Oxford, Chichele Professor of Modern
History, in his " Warwick the King-maker," which
appeared in 1891.
With regard to these : —
1. Mr. Snape thought that on the night before the battle,
Lord Audley and the Lancastrian army were at Camp Hill, and
the Earl of Salisbury and the Yorkists at Byrth Hill, both of
which places are at Maer, five miles to the North-east of
Bloreheath. He thought that the "pass" mentioned by the
Chronicler Rapin was at the foot of the Byrth Hill, and that
Salisbury's feigned retreat was continued all the way from there
to Audley's Cross on Bloreheath, near which place he admits that
the battle took place.
All this seems very unnecessary and improbable ; for, to begin
with, had Salisbury taken this line, he would not have been
retreating at all, but on the contrary advancing on his way to
Ludlow. And besides this, the "pass" can be found close to
Audley's Cross, without going five miles to look for it.
Vlll.
2. Mr. Beamont quotes the Chroniclers Stow, Baker,
Holinshed, Rapin, and also Dr. Lingard's account, based upon the
authority of Hall and Whethamstede. He also gives much
valuable information about mediaeval commissariat arrangements.
But, as regards the actual fighting, he seems to have been misled
by local tradition into supposing that, before the battle, Audley
was encamped at Audley Brow, near Moreton Say, five miles to
the West of Bloreheath, (but with his army on Little Drayton
Common three miles away from him); and Salisbury on Salisbury
Hill, one mile to the South of Market Drayton, and three miles
away from the battlefield.
This tradition about the camps at Audley Brow and Salisbury
Hill seems to have prevailed at any rate as early as the middle
of the eighteenth century, but is clearly wrong. For in the first
place, Audley Brow was called " Audley " in the thirteenth
century, two hundred years or more before the battle (Eyton's
"History of Shropshire," vol. ix., 269), and the name is in no
way connected with the fight. And, secondly, Salisbury had his
camp on Salisbury Hill, not before the battle, but after it. The
Parliamentary Rolls tell us that he was at Drayton the day after
the battle, and left his wounded behind there; and there seems to
be no room for doubt about the matter.*
Mr. Beamont, however, having adopted this theory, and, for
reasons which are rather hard to follow, having rejected the
natural and simple idea that the two armies were encamped at
Bloreheath, on opposite sides of the Hempmill brook; proceeds
to give his notion of what happened.
He invites us to believe that, on the day before the battle,
Salisbury divided his small force; leaving behind one portion at
Bloreheath to form an ambuscade there, and pushing on with the
remainder to Salisbury Hill. We are then to suppose that with
these advanced troops, after discharging a flight of arrows into the
enemy's camp on the other side of the Tern, he retired by way of
Peatswood, the Hills Farm, and Almington, to draw the
Lancastrians into the trap; and that, after a pursuit extending
• See the bill of impeachment from the Parliamentary Rolls, 38 Hen. VI.
Vol. V. fo. 348, quoted by Mr. Brooke, p. 33.
IX.
over three miles of broken country, they came up with him just
where he intended. The obvious comment is that it is most
unlikely that an experienced General like Salisbury would have had
his small force divided at night time, detaching part of it on some-
thing very like a wild goose chase; that he should have followed
at dawn with the remainder, taking a bee-line across two boggy
valleys and a wood, disregarding all roads and fords, when
pursued by a force of more than twice his strength, which
commanded the ordinary road between his point of departure and
his destination; and still more unlikely is it that, having done all
this, he should have been rewarded by a crushing victory.
Mr. Beamont has been followed by a later writer, Mr.
C. R. B. Barrett, who, in his "Battles and Battlefields of
England," has a chapter on Bloreheath. The unlikely story that
Salisbury had his camp at Salisbury Hill before the battle, and
retired from there to Bloreheath pursued by Audley, is there
repeated. It was also adopted by Miss F. M. Wilbraham, in her
historical novel " Queen Margaret's Badge," and has obtained
wide currency.
3. Mr. Brooke's paper may or may not have been intended
as a reply to Mr. Beamont's. He assumes, no doubt correctly,
that the opposing armies were facing each other on Bloreheath,
with the Hempmill brook between them; that the feigned flight
took place there, and did not go very far; and that the fighting
all took place within a small area.
Mr. Brooke gives most valuable quotations from contemporary
records, and much information about the leading men of the time,
and pedigrees illustrating their relationships. But his account of
the actual fighting is very condensed, extending to only twelve
lines of large print. He visited the battlefield twice before he
read his paper, and four times subsequently before he published
his book. And he knew nothing of local matters, except what he
picked up from some of the tenant farmers.
4. Professor Oman, as we should expect, throws much new
light upon the matter. He was acquainted with the contemporary
chronicles of William Gregory and Jehan de Waurin,t both of
t See Appendices A and B infra.
X.
which were unknown to the previous writers. These chronicles
give interesting particulars as to the nature of the fighting, and the
character of the ground, from which deductions may be drawn.
The Professor, however, was writing about Warwick, who was not
present at Bloreheath ; and was not concerned to go deeply into
the matter. He did not visit the battlefield; and his account of
the battle is a brilliant sketch condensed within the limits of a
single page.
Aim of the Present Writer. It can therefore scarcely be
said that the ground has been fully covered, and that there is no
more to be said on the subject. The present writer does not
pretend to be an authority either about military matters or
antiquities; but as regards this particular battle he has enjoyed
certain advantages, which may perhaps be held to justify his
taking up the pen. In the first place, he has lived near the
battlefield for more than thirty years, and knows both it and the
surrounding neighbourhood intimately. And, secondly, he has for
the last eight years been an enthusiastic student of local history,
having examined and noted every document connected with the
Manor of Tyrley that he could find, either in public collections or
in private hands; and by so doing has accumulated a considerable
mass of parochial information, some of it extending back to quite
early times.
By comparing this with the statements of the Chroniclers, and
with the treatises on mediaeval warfare, it has been possible to
arrive at certain conclusions with regard to the Battle of
Bloreheath, which are here set down.
It is hoped that this little book may be of interest, at any rate
to residents in the neighbourhood; and also that it may incite
others to undertake work of the same kind, and to do it better.
CHAPTER I.
AUDLEY'S CROSS.
HE Battle of Bloreheath was fought
on St. Tecla's Day, Sunday 23rd
September 1459. The combatants
were, on the one side, a Yorkist army
of about 5,000 men, commanded by
Richard Neville Earl of Salisbury,
which was marching from Middleham
Castle in the North Riding of Yorkshire, to effect a junction
with their friends at Ludlow ; and on the other, a Lancastrian
force of some 10,000 hastily collected men under James
Touchet Lord Audley, which had been got together to
oppose it.
The only surviving memorial of the battle is the Stone
Cross known as " Audley's Cross," which is supposed to mark
the spot where Lord Audley was killed ; and which stands
in a field on the South side of the road leading from
Newcastle-under-Lyme to Market Drayton, about two miles
and a-half from the latter place. It is in the Manor of Tyrley,
which includes all the Staffordshire part of Market Drayton
parish. Tyrley is now a civil parish. The existing cross was
repaired in 17G5, as the inscription on it records ; but it is
likely that a cross was set up here very soon after the battle.
Dr. Plot writing in 1686 mentions it, and calls it an
" antiquity." And we learn from a Court Roll of Tyrley
2 The Battle of Bloreheath.
Manor that a field adjoining the heath on which the cross
stood was known as the " Barn Cross" so long ago as 1553.
The farm now known as the Audley Cross Farm is
comparatively modern, having been built subsequently to the
enclosure of the heath in 1775.* Before that time there was
upon its site only a small holding of about six acres, known
as the " Squab," and which had been formed by some squatter
in the middle of the unenclosed waste. A mound near this
farmhouse has been supposed by some people to mark a burial
place ; but I do not know that there is any evidence to support
this conjecture.
CHAPTER II.
SUMMARY OF EVENTS BETWEEN
1422 AND 1459.
IN order to understand the battle, it is necessary to bear
in mind the political conditions of the time, and the leading
events of the years immediately preceding, which may be
briefly summarised as follows : —
During the reign of Henry VI. the Royal power was in
the hands of the Privy Council. This was necessarily so at
first, during the minority of the young King, but Henry's
character rendered him unfit at any time to exercise personal
control over the affairs not only of England, but also of
France, in those warlike days. He was upright, conscientious,
unselfish, and devout ; but he suffered from bodily weakness,
and from attacks of mental imbecility, the last being inherited
from his maternal grandfather King Charles VI. of France.
So long as the Duke of Bedford, Henry's uncle, survived, the
Government was in capable hands ; but after his death in
1435 this was no longer the case. And in the years that
followed, the English ascendancy in France was totally lost.
The Council was divided into two factions, one led by Cardinal
• Under the provisions of an Act passed in 1773.
PLAN OF
THE PARISH OF TYRLEY
IN THE COUNTY OF
STAFFORD
1912
-TO OAKLEY
SCALE
0 „ * * *
iMILE. .v
^
t
\
«>P
^
w— ^
M
>
^
0
Crj
,^J
^
f
J
<«
TO DRAYTON±=^
* '"8.
s S
1*
^S5
-to
STAFFORD
HOOKQATE
f>
The Battle of Bloreheath. 3
Beaufort and William de la Pole Earl of Suffolk, the other
by Humphrey Duke of Gloucester the King's uncle, and
Richard Duke of York the King's cousin and heir
presumptive. Suffolk arranged the truce with France in
1444, and the marriage of the King with Margaret of Anjou
in 1445 ; and in 1447 the deaths of Beaufort and Gloucester,
and the removal of York to Ireland, rendered him completely
master of the situation. The failure of his foreign policy, and
the loss of Normandy, brought about his fall and death in
1450 ; and the Duke of York became the spokesman of the
national discontent. In addition to his high rank, he was a
man of experience and of approved worth both in war and
administration : and up to this time he had shown no
inclination to push his hereditary claim to the Crown (which
was better than Henry's), but was patiently waiting for the
inheritance to come to him in the natural course of events.
But in 1453, more than eight years after the marriage of
Henry and Margaret, the birth of a Prince of Wales
disappointed his expectations, and materially altered his
position for the worse. In 1454, during the King's illness,
he was appointed Protector, but on the recovery of Henry a
year later he found himself deprived of all authority. This
led him to resort to force ; and the first battle of St. Albans
restored him to power, but made the quarrel between him and
the Queen irreconcilable. His chief supporters were his
brother-in-law Richard Earl of Salisbury, and the latter's son
Richard Earl of Warwick (known in history as the " King-
maker "). The Queen relied principally on the Dukes of
Somerset and Exeter, the Earls of Wiltshire and Shrewsbury,
and Viscount Beaumont. In 1457, by the efforts of King
Henry, the Queen and the Duke of York were brought
together and a pacification effected between them ; but this
was more apparent than real, and in 1458 further trouble
ensued.
Warwick, who was Governor of Calais, had been
summoned to London to account for his proceedings there ;
4 The Battle of Bloreheath.
and in Westminster was set upon by the retainers of Somerset
and Wiltshire, so that he barely escaped with his life. This
attack was supposed by the Yorkists to have been arranged
by the Queen. After this both sides organised their forces
and prepared for war. The Queen made a progress through
Lancashire and Cheshire, taking her infant son with her, and
distributing liveries of the silver swan amongst her adherents.
The Yorkist headquarters were at Ludlow, where the Duke
himself was. Ludlow was his private property, as heir of the
great Marcher family of Mortimer, and he had also the
important Castle of Wigmore in the same district. Salisbury's
strength lay in the North Riding of Yorkshire, and he was at
his Castle of Middleham. Warwick was back again at Calais,
where he could command considerable force, both by sea and
land.
Matters were brought to a head by the dispatch of a
summons to Salisbury, ordering him, in the King's name, to
come to London. To do so would have been to place himself
in the hands of his enemies ; so he naturally disobeyed, and
proceeded with some 3,000 of his tenantry to join his friends
at Ludlow. Warwick was told to do the same ; and though
he had to pass through a hostile region, succeeded in arriving
there without fighting.
CHAPTER III.
SALISBURY AND HIS ARMY.
(A) The Yorkist Leader. With regard to the personality
of the Earl of Salisbury and the quality of his troops, it must
be remembered that Richard Neville was 60 years of age,
having been born in 1399, and that he was the son of Ralph
Neville Lord of Raby and Middleham, who was in charge of
the Scottish border in the reigns of Henry IV. and V., and
who was created Earl of Westmorland. Ralph was twice
married ; by his first wife Margaret Stafford he had nine
children, and by his second wife Joan Beaufort he had
The Battle of B I ore heath. 5
fourteen, including six sons, of whom Richard was the eldest.
Richard saw some service in France in his young days, but
he does not seem to have been engaged in the later disastrous
campaigns. In 1425 he married Alice Montacute, daughter
and heiress of the Earl of Salisbury ; and on the death of his
father-in-law, who was killed before Orleans in 1428, he
succeeded to the title and estates. In 1433 he was, according
to Lord Campbell,t Lord of the East and West Marches of
Scotland ; and in the following year he was retained by
indenture to serve in France with a contingent of three
bannerets, seven knights, two hundred and forty-nine men-at-
arms, and a thousand and forty archers, but it does not appear
that he was actually called upon to go.
Professor Oman has explained in his " Warwick the
King-maker " that there was bitter discord between old
Ralph Neville's two families over the division of the
inheritance ; the second one having, with the assistance of
their mother, secured the lion's share. And in 1435 there was
actual fighting going on between them in Yorkshire. In 1436,
Salisbury, with his brother-in-law York, went on a futile
embassy to France. And after his return in 1437, he was
made a Privy Councillor ; an appointment which he held for
the next ten years, and which kept him busy in London
for the most part during that period. After that, he
again turned his attention to war and recruiting. Professor
Oman quotes a deed executed by him and Sir Walter
Strykelande, Knight, in September 1449, whereby the latter
placed himself and his retinue of nearly 300 men at the service
of the Earl, and in his pay, against all folk saving his allegiance
to the King. This agreement was perhaps only one of many,
which would account for the rapid mobilisation of the
Yorkshire forces in 1455, whereby the first battle of St. Albans
was won. In that battle Salisbury took a leading part, and
must have added to his military knowledge in a sufficiently
practical manner.
t Lives of the Lord Chancellors.
6 The Battle of Bloreheath.
He was Lord Chancellor for a short time during the Duke
of York's Protectorate in 1454-5 ; but it does not appear that
he shone as a legal luminary.
One other point as regards his family relationships and
his connection with the owner of Tyrley Manor. The Lord
of Tyrley at this time was John Neville, of Oversley near
Alcester. His father was Ralph Neville, second son of old
Earl Ralph and Margaret Stafford. Consequently we should
anticipate that John would not be friendly towards his
half-uncle Richard. But John's mother was Mary Ferrers,
who was daughter, by her first husband Robert Ferrers, of
the very same Joan Beaufort who was Salisbury's mother.
This fact may possibly have influenced his feelings in the
opposite direction ; and as the result he may have decided to
be strictly neutral. At any rate, so far as I know, there is no
evidence that he took a decided line one way or the other.
His father Ralph had died in 1458, his mother having died
previously ; and he then succeeded to Tyrley.* But he was
not in possession of it when he died in 1483§ ; and he seems
to have handed it over to his grandson in his lifetime.
(B) The Yorkist Army. The most circumstantial account
which we have of Salisbury's army is given by Waurin, who
says that it consisted of about twenty-five knights and from
six to seven thousand armed men (hommes de-ffensables], of
whom not more than forty were men-at-arms, that is heavy
cavalry. The estimate is perhaps rather high, both as to
knights and rank and file. The Act of Attainder passed by
the Lancastrian partizan Parliament, which met at Coventry
in this same year, gives the names of five knights only and
two esquires. These were Sir John and Sir Thomas Neville,
Salisbury's sons, Sir Thomas Harrington,* his son-in-law, Sir
John Conyers, and Sir Thomas Parr ; with Thomas Mering,
of Tong in Yorkshire, and William Stanley (afterwards Sir
JPub. Rec. Office. P.M.I. 36 H. VI. No. ai.
§ P.M.I. 22 Edw. IV. No. 26.
• Sometimes called Lord Harrington. He had married Salisbury's daughter
Katherine. He was killed at Wakefield.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 7
William), esquires.t The Act of Attainder gives the number
of men with them as above five thousand, and there is no
doubt that, besides the men who started from Middleham,
others joined during the march.
The force had carts with it, so probably it carried some
supplies, as well as equipment, and was not wholly dependent
for subsistence upon the country through which it passed.
It had no artillery ,+ nor does it seem ta have relied upon
firearms of any kind, though we do hear of some blank firing
during the night after the battle. With regard to training and
discipline, the Yorkshiremen, or some of them, may have taken
part in the battle of St. Albans four years before, and they had
no doubt had experience of fighting, and looting, on the
Scottish border. We may be sure that they knew how to
handle their weapons ; and the march of over 100 miles,
through a difficult country, must have been of great value in
accustoming officers and men to work together as component
parts of an organised body.
As to the route taken from Middleham, we have no very
precise information. Mr. Beamont says that it was through
Craven (that is the part of the North Riding in which the
river Aire rises), and South Lancashire ; and from Manchester
by Congleton to Newcastle-under-Lyme. The wording of
the Act of Attainder passed by the Parliament at Coventry
implies that Salisbury changed his plans and altered his line
of march in consequence of the resistance which was
threatened to his progress.§ And it is evident that his direct
road to Ludlow would have been through the middle of
Cheshire, and by Whitchurch, Wem, and Shrewsbury, and
not by Newcastle and Market Drayton. The Parliamentary
Rolls give the distance from Newcastle to Bloreheath as six
miles only ; but it is nearly twelve. The tendency of old
writers was to under-estimate mileage.
t Sir Roger Kynaston, who is supposed to have killed Lord Audley, is not
in this list. But he may have been present, and was certainly at Ludford,
subsequently. Blakeway's " Sheriffs of Shropshire."
t There were guns at Ludlow.
§ Brooke, p. 30, and Rot. Parl. 38 Henry VI. (1459) Vol. V. 348.
8 The Battle of Bloreheath.
CHAPTER IV.
AUDLEY AND HIS ARMY.
LEAVING the Yorkist army within a day's march of the
scene of conflict, let us now turn to the other side, and see
what measures had been taken to bar its progress.
(A) The Lancastrian Leader. James Touchet, Lord
Audley, the Lancastrian general, was a man who had inherited
great possessions in Staffordshire, Shropshire, and Cheshire.
His Staffordshire estates lay round the Manor from which he
took his title, and his neighbouring Castle of Heleigh. His
Shropshire seat was the Red Castle at Hawkstone. In
Cheshire he had Newhall Tower, near Combermere, and a
considerable portion of the old barony of Nantwich. All
these were ancient possessions of the Audley family, and had
come to him through his great-grandmother Joan de Audley,
who married Sir John Touchet in the reign of Edward III.
And in addition he had inherited from his father's family the
Manor of Buglawton, near Congleton, in the Macclesfield
Hundred of Cheshire ; besides lands at Markeaton and other
places in Derbyshire.
Born in 1400, he attained his majority and was summoned
to Parliament in 8th Hen. V. (1421) ; and Ormerod says of
him (History of Cheshire, Vol. Ill, 41) : " The Lords Audley
had now arrived at a pitch of power and influence which
causes their personal history henceforward to relate more
nearly to the annals of the kingdom at large, than to those
of the county of their ancestors." He served in France under
Henry V., and returned to England with the King's body in
1422. And he had a command in France in 1431. He was
twice married, first to Margaret daughter of Lord Cobham,
by whom he had two daughters ; and secondly to Eleanor,
natural daughter of Edmund Holland Earl of Kent, by the
Lady Constance Plantagenet daughter of Edmund Langley
The Battle of Bloreheath. 9
Duke of York. Eleanor endeavoured to prove that her father
and Lady Constance were married, and that she herself was
legitimate, and the sole heiress of her father's lands ; which
brought her into collision with her father's sisters and others,
who had divided his property between them. These
co-heiresses and their representatives included the Duchesses
of York and Clarence, the Duke of York, and the Earls of
Westmorland and Salisbury ; who, fearing that they might
lose their estates, preferred a Bill in Parliament 9 Henry VI.
(1431) against Eleanor Lady Audley, upon which she was
declared to be the offspring of " pretended espousals," and
consequently entitled to nothing. So that Lord and Lady
Audley had a grievance of long standing against the Duke of
York and both branches of the Neville family.*
After this we hear no more of Audley till 1457, when he
received a commission to summon, if necessary, the Sheriff
and Posse Comitatus of Herefordshire to suppress any designs
formed by the King's enemies in that county .t Mr. Beamont
thinks that this commission led to his further employment in
1459. But, whether that was so or not, we can understand
that Queen Margaret would trust him, not only because of his
long fidelity to the house of Lancaster, but also on account of
his old grudge against the Yorkist leaders, which could hardly
be forgiven, or forgotten. Whatever the reasons for the
selection may have been, Audley was chosen by the Queen
to uphold her cause in the Midland Counties in September,
1459.
(B) The Lancastrian Army. How much time he had in
which to prepare is not stated ; but he must have made good
use of it, in order to bring 10,000 men into line at the right
spot at the right moment. He would no doubt summon the
* Chetwynd's " History of Pirehill Hundred," Salt Collections, Vol. XII. N.S.
And Harwood's " Erdeswick," 94.
t The Duke of York's Castle of Wigraore was in Herefordshire ; and much of
his strength lay in the Welsh Marches.
10 The Battle of Bloreheath.
tenants from his own estates to muster* ; and they would
probably do so at his three Castles of Heleigh, Hawkstone,
and Newhall. From thence they might naturally proceed to
Market Drayton, and concentrate there. Drayton is centrally
placed, and not more than ten miles from any one of the
Castles. It had the further advantage of being held by an
unwarlike Lord, the Abbot of Combermere. And, as for the
neighbouring Castle of Tyrley, it had little strength or
importance, and its Baron had presumably no great love for
his relative, the Yorkist general.
Audley's army was numerous, and it was strong in cavalry.
As to the nobility and knights who served with it, we have no
complete list. But we know who were killed and the names
of some of the prisoners, and these formed a large proportion
of those who were engaged. The second in command was
John Sutton, Lord of Dudley in South Staffordshire, and also
of Malpas in Cheshire. He was a man of distinction, having
carried the Standard at the funeral of Henry V., and acted as
Lieutenant of Ireland, and in other capacities, for Henry VI.
He was no friend to the Duke of York, who had imprisoned
him twice, in 1449 and in 1455. § There were also serving Sir
Robert de Booth, of Dunham ; Sir Hugh Calveley, Sir John
} With regard do the process of mobilisation, the following Covenant in a lease
is instructive. It relates to a hundred acre farm in Betchton, a Cheshire
Manor of which the Lords Audley were tenants in capite, and the
Davenports of Henbury rnesne lords, in the isth and i6th centuries. The
lease in question dates from Queen Elizabeth's reign ; but the Covenant
had no doubt been handed down from earlier days, and the same wording
continued to be used by the iWilbrahams, who succeeded the Davenports
as lords of Betchton, as late as 1646. And the Wilbrahams have still,
at Delamere, some armour which was intended for the equipment of their
retinue. It shows that the Cheshire tenantry were bound by covenant to
be prepared for war, and that when their feudal lord served personally,
more was expected of them than when the Sheriff made a general levy.
Covenant. " And when and so' often as the said Randle Davenport
or his heirs shall within the said term be appointed to serve the Queen's
majesty her heirs or successors in the wars in his or their proper person
That then the said John Ellison if he be then living or able to serve or
otherwise his assign or assigns shall in his or their proper person be
ready furnished with armour and weapons to serve under and in the
Retinue of the said Randle Davenport or his heirs in the same wars.
Also when and so often as the said Randle Davenport or his heirs shall
within the said term be compelled to set forth or furnish any men within
the lordship of Betchton aforesaid for and towards the same wars that
then the said John Ellison or his assigns shall and will procure or find
one sufficient man unfurnished to serve in the said wars at the appoint-
ment of the said Randle Davenport or his heirs or shall contribute in
money or otherwise to the said Randle Davenport and his heirs as others
then tenants of the same Randle of the like rent shall hereafter do."
§ Brooke, p. 27, where the authorities are given.
TYRLEY MANOR IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. /
>A
SCALE
H
j
w ,11 ^
^4- %L s^. 1
i
^ F
«
1
/
/
» E
i /" / ->
^, /**£
%^ J^
IMILE
^0-\ -V-cvV O .n/'-VN;
v^° ^ c^ S, A Hk .' «W
:fe-*A' 2,<£ >->,.'•'
,^f.f:^
Heath lands are coloured Yellow.
Arable lands are coloured Pink.
The Red and Blue lines show the supposed positions
of the Lancastrian and Yorkist armies at the
Battle of Bloreheath, 23rd September, 1459.
The Battle of Bloreheatk. 11
Done (Donne, or Dunne), of Utkinton (or Wickington),
Cheshire, hereditary forester of Delamere Forest, whose
younger brother Hugh married Lord Audley's daughter ;
Sir Robert Downes, of Shrigley, near Macclesfield ; Sir
Thomas Dutton, of Dutton, son-in-law of Lord Audley ; Sir
John Egerton, of Egerton ; Sir John Legh, of Booths ;
Sir Richard Molineux, of Sefton, and Sir William Troutbeck,
of Dunham-on-the-Hill, both of whom had married daughters
of the late and sisters of the present Lord Stanley, of
Lathomt ; and Sir Hugh Venables, of Kinderton, near
Middlewich. All in this list, with the exception of Lord
Dudley, were amongst the slain ; and it is evident that the
gentry of Cheshire were strongly represented. But the force
must have been wanting in organisation and cohesion. The
units of which it was composed could not have had much
opportunity of practising concerted action, so as to gain
feelings of mutual reliance. And they had probably seen less
actual fighting than their opponents, by reason of the Welsh
March being more tranquil than that of Scotland. But we
may be quite certain that they were actuated by strong feelings
of local patriotism, and of hostility to the Northern marauders,
whose presence they resented as an intrusion.
CHAPTER V.
THE GROUND.
(A) General Features of Bloreheatk and its Vicinity.
The character of Audley's army must have influenced him in
his selection of the ground on which to fight. He would wish
to be in the open, where his superior numbers and his cavalry
could be employed to advantage ; and to avoid forest fighting,
which requires a special training and is always hazardous.
t This appears to be correct; but Ormerod in one (Vol. II. 42) place says that
it was Sir John Troutbeck, father of Sir William, who was killed. Sir
William is sometimes described as "of Dunham " ; but in the Herald's
pedigree of 1589 he is said to be " of Prynes Castle in Wirral."
12 The Battle of Bloreheath.
He determined, therefore, to take up a position immediately
to the South of the great North Staffordshire forest region,
so as to intercept his adversary as soon as he emerged from
it. The Southernmost part of Bloreheath was the place which
he selected for his position ; and this was to a great extent
open ground, but not by any means entirely so. In 1587 the
unenclosed waste of Bloreheath amounted to about six
hundred acres ; and in 1459 it was probably a little more. It
belonged to the Manor of Tyrley, which included, besides
Tyrley, the townships of Blore, Almington, and Hales.
The hamlet of Blore* is at present represented by two
farms, which stand on an exposed knoll more than 500 feet
above the sea ; but was formerly more populous.^ It stands
to the South-east of Bloreheath, and was on Audley's right
flank.
About half a mile to the South of it is Hales* ; and a mile
to the West of Hales is Almington,§ the most important of the
three villages.
Half a mile to the North of Almington is another small
cluster of houses belonging to Almington, known as Sandy
Lane. Blore, Hales, Almington, and Sandy Lane form the
corners of a quadrilateral, in which were situated the common
cornfields of the three villages: that of Blore on the East,
that of Almington on the West, and that of Hales in the
centre. These fields formed a tract of more or less level
country, about a mile long by half a mile wide, joining on to
the Southern end of Bloreheath, and sloping gradually to the
South and West. They were fenced round while the corn
was growing ; but after harvestll were thrown open, so that
the cattle of the tenants might have common of pasture over
them.
• Blore is derived from the same root as " blow," " blare," and " blast," and
means an exposed and windy place. — Duignan.
t The pannage list of 1555 gives fourteen householders in Blore.
j Hales, from " healh," meadow, or pasture. — Duignan.
§ Pronounced Ammington, but spelt Alkementon in the I3th century. Probably
derived from Alkmund. — Duignan.
H The battle was fought 23rd September.
The Battle of Blorekeath. 13
It must have been a great convenience to Audley to have
this open and unencumbered space in rear of his position, on
which to pitch his camp,t park his baggage train, and exercise
his troops. Moreover, the slope of the Almington cornfield
towards the South, down to a hollow known as Cromodale, or
Crumbuldale (near the new Bloreheath Farm) would allow him
to conceal his force from an enemy approaching from the
North.t This slope is called in the tithe apportionment the
" Bent," a word which seems to mean a declivity, as in
" Bowers Bent " in Standon parish.
To the North-east and East of Audley's position was the
Rounhay, or Rowney, Wood. The word Rounhay, according
to Mr. Duignan, means the rough locality ; and this Wood is
rough enough, as all North Staffordshire fox-hunters know.
In the sixteenth century it had become sub-divided : the
Northern portion (corresponding to the present Rowney Farm
of 140 acres) being known as the Little Rowney ; and the
Southern portion as the " Brandwood," or " Burnt Wood," the
middle portion being called the Great Rowney. The Great
Rowney and Brandwood extended as far South as the Park
Lane, which divided them from the Park ; and included the
land now known as the " Cold Comfort Farm." They also
overlapped the North-eastern corner of the Park, took in the
existing " Burnt Wood Farm," and extended as far as the
Northern limit of the " Knowl Wood." Eastwards, these
woods, which covered about 700 acres, extended as far as the
boundary of Tyrley Manor, and abutted upon the woods of
the Bishop of Lichfteld, which formed part of his Manor of
Eccleshall. The name Burnt Wood, which has superseded
the old name of Great Rowney, is doubtless derived from the
t The Chronicler Rapin says that he was encamped.
} It is not perhaps an important point, but the bill of impeachment describes
the battle as having been fought " at Blore in your shire of Stafford,
in the feldes of the same toune called Bloreheath. Rot. Parl. 38
Hen. VI. 348.
The quadrilateral was all cultivated in 1587, as well as other land
outside of it In 1459 parts of it may still have been waste. And these
would be at the Northern end of the Hales and Almington fields, and
the Southern end of the Blorefield ; that is, at the parts most remote
from the respective villages.
14 The Battle of Bloreheath.
operations of the ironfounders, charcoal burners, and glass
makers, who obtained their fuel from it ; whose doings are
commemorated in the names " Smith's Rough," " Smithy
Breach," " Glasshouse," and " Coalbrook," and whose refuse
heaps are still to be found.§ But in 1459 the destruction had
not perhaps gone very far ; and the district to the East of the
battlefield was for the most part a dense jungle.*
The Park, which comes into the story of the battle, must
not be confused with Tyrley Old Park, which lay much farther
to the West, near Tyrley Castle. Still less must it be
confused with Blore Park, belonging to the Bishop of
Lichfield : a great enclosure more than a mile in diameter,
which lay a little more than three miles to the South-east of
Bloreheath, and joined up to Chipnall and Cheswardine.
Tyrley New Park was enclosed by the Le Botiler Lords
of Wem and Tyrley in the reign of Edward I., or Edward Il.t ;
and was used by them as a hunting ground in the 14th
century.* In the 15th century the absentee Neville Lords
must have let the grazing rights to tenants ; and in the 16th
century we find the Park divided up. Originally, it must have
included about 375 acres, and extended from the Park
Lane on the North-east to the Lloyd on the South-west. On
the East it was bounded by the Burnt Wood and Knowl
Wood, on the South by the Knowl Wood and on the West by
the enclosed lands of Blore and Hales. It was divided up as
follows, and the division had taken place before 1524 : —
Acres.
1. The Park Spring Wood, including the
present Park Spring Farm 191
2. The South-western portion (including
the Lloyd Drumble), let with
Almington Farm, and called the New
Park in 1524. (This portion included
a field called the " Chapel Field.") ... 100
§ The Chronicle of Croxden Abbey records, under date 1345: "The wood of
Gibbe rydinges, Lindenecliff, and le Newehaye was burnt and sold to
Joseph Skachare for 32 marks sterling and two and a-half horseloads of
iron." This wood had been burnt before in 1290.
• The first Statute for the protection of woods was passed in 1543.
t See the Close Roll of 10 Edward II. (1316).
J Some men were proceeded against for poaching in this Park in 15 Edward
III. Salt Collections, Vol. XIV. 55.
BATTLE-FIELD OF BLOREHEATH 25-xpr 1459
FROM THE TITHE MAP or 1X33
SCALE
VOS 3"5OYDS
TOWN FIELD OF ALMINQTON \
(IN iS87)
The Battle of Bloreheath. 15
3. The North-western angle, including the
fields called Park Field, Park Meadow,
Gorsey Hill, the Upper and Lower
Pools, and Upper and Lower
Furlongs, all of which are, and have
long been, held with one of the Blore
Farms 84
375
Audley might have felt quite easy about his right flank,
for it was most unlikely that the enemy would enter upon such
rough and broken country to try to turn it.
It was also improbable that they would try to work round
his left. Had they done so, they would first of all have had
to cross the Wemberton Brook, which is an awkward obstacle
anywhere. And, had they succeeded in doing that, they would
have been liable to be attacked in a most dangerous position
between the Brook and the river Tern, where defeat would
have meant annihilation.
(B) The Actual Battle-field. We have now to consider
more particularly the ground which Audley occupied and had
in front of him, that which lies to the North and West of the
hamlet of Blore. From the cornfield the ground slopes
gradually down to a little brook, which runs East and West,
and has a narrow valley with steep banks. On the modern,
large-scale ordnance maps it is called the " Hemp-mill
Brook " ; and this was the name by which Mr. Brooke knew it
in 1853. But in 1554§ it was known as the "Wemberton
Brook " ; and in a Charter of the 13th century it is called
" Wambrimbroc."* The meaning of this latter name is easy
to understand. Warn, or Wem, is from the same Anglo-Saxon
root as womb, and means a hollow ; brim means border, or
bank. So that the ancient name signifies " The brook with
the hollowed-out channel." This brook is formed by several
§ Tyrley Court Roll.
* Charter of Sir William le Botiler to the Abbey of Cumbennere.— Tunstall
papers.
1G The Battle of B I or cheat h.
small streamlets flowing from the North-east, East, and
South-east, which meet near the place marked on the ordnance
map as " Blore Farm " ; and close to this farm is a strong
spring, formerly known as Blore Wall,t the water from which
also flows into the brook. Below the farm the brook runs
for the most part between steep banks for the rest of its
course, some two miles, till it joins the river Tern between
Oakley and Tunstall.
In order to realise the problem which was engaging
Audley's attention, it is necessary to understand what the
roads were like in his time. They were very different from
what they are now ; and it must suffice here to state the
writer's conclusions on the subject, reserving arguments and
proofs for separate consideration in Appendix C.
The straight wide and well-graded road which now
crosses Bloreheath, running nearly East and West, did not
then exist. It is the result of a Turnpike Act, and an
Inclosure Act, passed in 1768 and 1773 respectively. Before
that time travellers proceeding from Newcastle to Market
Drayton, and entering Tyrley Manor where the Loggerheads
Inn now stands, would follow the line of the present road past
the Rowney Farm and the Folly Plantation. But about a
hundred yards beyond the plantation the old road bent
considerably to the left, and followed the course of the present
bridle road from Mucclestone to Blore as far as the Wemberton
Brook. From this point the road to Blore village, steep,
crooked, and worn into a deep hollow by the traffic of ages
and the action of water, crossed the brook and led more or
less straight on in a Southerly direction. But persons going
to Drayton would here turn to the right and proceed
Westwards along the valley of the Wemberton Brook, passing
between Audley Cross and the old Bloreheath cornmill. So
that for a distance of about 750 yards the road passed through
a narrow defile (coming out again on to the open heath ground
t " Wall " means well or spring. To wall means to boil; as salt walling
— salt boiling.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 17
on the Southern side of the valley, after passing the mill pond),
and proceeded much as at present to Sandy Lane and
Shiff ord's Bridge. Here then was the " pass " mentioned by
the chronicler Rapin, which has given such trouble to
commentators, more especially Mr. Snape. And it was the
existence of this defile, and the determination to contest the
passage of it, which caused Audley to take up the position he
did.
With regard to other roads then existing, it is likely that
the road along the Wemberton Brook valley was not confined
to the above-mentioned 750 yards, but extended up the valley
into the woodlands and ultimately to Eccleshall, and also down
stream to the Tern at Oakley Mill. The road from Sandy
Lane to Mucclestone went as it does now, crossing the
Wemberton Brook, by a ford with deep and narrow
approaches, near to the existing bridge. And there was a
track leading from Blore village to Sandy Lane, skirting the
Northern edge of the common cornfields and running parallel
to Audley's line of front. But the road which now crosses
the main road at right-angles below Bloreheath mill, and leads
to Hales and Blore in one direction and to Mucclestone in the
other, is modern, and was made after the Inclosure Act.
As regards the other features of the ground, the pond
called Daisy Lake, which lies in the valley below Bloreheath
mill, does not seem to be older than the end of the 17th or
beginning of the 18th century.* The banks of the valley were
probably originally a good deal steeper than they are at
present. Road-making, gravel digging, irrigation, ploughing,
and rabbits have all had a tendency to tone them down and
wear away their sharpness ; but that in their natural state
they offered a considerable obstacle is evidenced by the
twisting of the road in order to avoid them.
* I have not found it mentioned earlier than 1704. In 1711 a fulling mill stood
between it and the lane, to which it furnished the water power. The
watercourse from it to Shifford's Grange dates from early in the igth
century. — Tunstall papers.
18 The Battle of Bloreheath,
It is likely that Audley's left flank rested on the mill, and
that he did not occupy any of the ground beyond it, though
he would, of course, keep it under observation. As already
pointed out, it would be easy for him to frustrate any attempt
of the enemy to pass on this side of him. The mill is
undoubtedly ancient, and is mentioned in the 14th century
" Extents " of the Manor.§ The mill house still remains,
but the mill is gone and the pond is dry. Both were there,
however, in 1838, when the tithe map was made. When the
water was pounded up, the brook above the mill must have
been a more serious obstacle than it is at present.
Turning to Audley's right flank, we see on the maps
that in front of it lies the homestead at present known as Blore
Farm. This is a place of great antiquity, being a freehold
carved out of the Manor of Tyrley by William Pantulf who
died in 1233. This information comes from the Chartulary at
Oakley, which was compiled about the year 1720. At that date
there was in existence a Charter by which the aforesaid
William Pantulf granted to John Mevrell of Bluer a hide of
land* in the vill of Bluer, the boundaries of which were given
Most unfortunately this deed has long been missing, and
the information which it contained has been lost. The
presumption nevertheless is that the boundaries of this land,
like those of the granges granted by the Pantulfs to the
monks at Combermere, were formed either by streams or
ancient tracks ; and that the Northern and Western sides of
this " hide of land in the vill of Bluer " were bounded in the
13th century by the road leading from Newcastle to Market
Drayton, as we know that they were in Queen Elizabeth's
reign.t
Another Charter relating to this place dates from 1339,
and by it Hugo Cabot de Buntanesdale granted to Hugo de
Hulle his capital messuage, with the adjacent land and
§ Pub. Record Office. P.M. Inquests of the le Botilers.
• About 180 acres, according to Fleta, who wrote in the time of Edward I.
t The map of 1773, at Oakley, shows this farm surrounded by roads, except
where it is joined up to the Burnt Wood and Rowney.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 19
meadows in the vill of Netherblore, together with his
bondman (nativus) Thomas Godfre, and all his family
(sequela), and all his goods and chattels ; and with the homage
and services of William, the son of Thomas, the shepherd,
and of his other tenants in the same vill of Netherblore.
This Hugo de Hulle, or Hill, took his name from the
Titterstone Clee Hill, near Ludlow, and was the ancestor of
the Hills, of Hawkstone.+ His son William Hill married the
heiress of Buntingsdale, and died in 1371, leaving a son
Griffin Hill who lived till 1434. Humphrey Hill, the son of
the latter, appears to have held these lands till 1484. And in
1515 his son William died in possession of them. This
William was born about 1444, and lived at Netherblore in
his father's lifetime,§ but hardly so early as 1459.
This capital messuage of Netherblore was therefore a
place of some importance ; it was probably moated and
capable of defence ; and with its fences and inclosures had
an important bearing upon the battle. When Audley was on
the defensive, he would depend upon it to protect his right
flank ; and when he became the assailant, it prevented him
from getting at the Yorkist left, and compelled him to attack
their centre and right. In 1773* the farm contained 190
acres ; and there is no reason to suppose that its original
boundaries had been in any way altered. About twenty acres
of it, known as the Dalacre, or Dallacre.t lie to the South of
the brook. It is good land, and probably formed part of the
original arable land of the farm, and was fenced round at a
very early date. And beyond it, on the East, lay boggy
meadows bordering on the forest. I think it probable that all
the land lying between the Dalacre, the cornfield of Blore,
and the old lane leading down to the defile was already
enclosed in 1459. It is all of good quality, it lies close to the
t Herald's Visitation of Shropshire, 1623.
§ Close Roll of 1472.
• A survey of the farm was made at this date, and a map drawn, which is now
at Oakley,
t Probably from Dale or Dell, as this ground lies in the valley.
20 The Battle of Bloreheath.
village ; and for a considerable part of its total length the
ditch of the boundary fence of the Dalacre is on the inside
and not on the outside, which suggests that some of the
adjoining land was inclosed earlier even than the Dalacre
itself.*
It is probable that the entire farm of Netherblore, being
held in severalty, and lying in a ring fence, was hedged round
in 1459. But as to this we cannot be absolutely certain.
The Abbot of Combermere held Stafford's Grange in the
same way, and had the right to take fencing materials from
the Tyrley woods : yet a considerable portion of the poorer
land of this grange remained open waste so late as 1773.
The question as to whether the land on the South side of
the defile and on the West side of the old lane was inclosed
or not, is more difficult to decide. We know from the Writ
of Partition that there was uninclosed waste lying between the
Bloreheath mill pool and the village cornfields in 1587. It
was computed to amount to 36 acres, but was probably rather
more, perhaps 40 or 45. But, after allowing for this, there
still remains a piece of about 24 acres ; which at the time of
the Tithe Survey was divided into three fields, known as Nab
Hill, Smith's Nab Hill, and Heath Dale. This was evidently
inclosed land in 1587, and let with one of the Blore farms ;
the question is whether it was inclosed in 1459 or not. Nab,
or Knob, is no doubt derived from a little hillock in the Nab
Hill field ; and it does not suggest anything as to the date
of inclosure, nor does Heath Dale. But the name of Smith
throws a ray of light. Andrew Smith occupied a large farm
at Blore, and also the Bloreheath mill, in 1587 ; and it is very
likely that he was the man who inclosed this tongue of land,
which runs down to the mill. I do not find the name of Smith
in connection with Blore before this date, though there were
* Three of these fields are known as "The Paddock" and "Butler's far
and near Paddocks." This seems to put these inclosures back to the
time of the Butler, or le Botiler, lords of Tyrley ; the last of whom died
in 1369. The fields between the Paddocks and .the brook are called
the " Great and Little Kitchen," and contain 7i acres. Possibly they
may have been the common vegetable plot of the village.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 21
men of that name at the " Walk Mill," near Market Drayton,
fifty years earlier, and at Almington in 1439.§ The inference,
therefore, seems to be that Smith's Nab Hill, at any rate, and
probably the other two fields also, would be open heath ground
at the time of the battle.
These doubtful fences are shown upon the map with
dotted lines. If they were in existence, and were lined by
Lancastrians on the morning of the day, they would have
added to the difficulty of the Yorkists in forcing a passage
through the defile. But they would also have made it difficult
for the Lancastrian horse to range themselves in front of the
Yorkist line of battle, as Waurin says they did ; and would
have greatly hindered their cavalry charges. On the whole,
I should be inclined to guess that none of these fences were
then in existence ; but were made between 1459 and 1587.
Inclosure was proceeding at that time, we know ; for the Court
Roll of 1556 refers to "the newly-enclosed land at Crumbuldale
field." At any rate it is quite clear that there was no fence
along the Northern bank of the defile.
The woodland certainly came very near to the
Netherblore homestead on the Eastern side ; for, besides the
Great Rowney Wood which bounded the property, a large
proportion of the little domain itself was still timbered. Even
in 1773 ten acres remained so, and the field names, " Burnt
Wood Field " and " New Hay," which refer to another
twenty-three acres, are suggestive of clearings. And the
post mortem inquest of Richard Wilbraham (who died
possessed of this farm in 1612) states that more than a quarter
of it was still uncleared in the reign of James I.* The land
§ Old papers at Tunstall.
* The descriptions of the farm are rather difficult to reconcile. The Inquests
p.m. of the Hill family, dated 1371, 1434, and 1515, give no information.
A fine levied in 1601 gives the parcels as " a messuage and garden,
100 acres of arable, 20 of meadow, 60 of pasture, 10 of wood, and 200
of furze and heath — total 390." The Inquest p.m. of Richard
Wilbraham, taken in 1612, gives the quantities as 20 acres arable, 15
of meadow, 20 of pasture, 20 of wood — total 75. As to the first estimate,
the parcels in fines have no pretensions to accuracy, and are made
all-embracing. The post mortem verdicts on the other hand usually
understate land values. Besides which the Wilbrahams were in the
habit of using the Cheshire acre ; which was measured with an eight
yard rod, instead of with one of five and a-half, and contained more
than two statute acres. There was also a local acre in use in Blore,
called the Bloreland acre.
22 The Battle of Bloreheath.
on this side of the farm is all strong clay, and grows good oak
trees at the present day.
It is evident therefore that Audley occupied a defensive
position of great strength ; and that on general grounds he
could afford to bide his time and await developments. We
have now to enquire into the question of the arms and tactics
of the period ; and we shall see that there were strong
additional reasons which made it imperative for him to play
a waiting game.
CHAPTER VI.
ARMS, TACTICS, AND GENERALSHIP.
(A) Arms and Tactics. It has already been said that
the Yorkists had no artillery,* and do not appear to have made
any serious use of gunpowder ; and the same remark applies
to the Lancastrians. Both armies were of the old-fashioned
type, relying upon the long bow as their missile weapon, and
upon pikemen and billmen and armoured horsemen for
fighting at close quarters. Weapons of war were much what
they had been in the reign of Edward III. ; the only difference
being that the armour now worn was thicker and heavier, to
afford more complete protection against arrows. This of
course added to the weight that men and horses had to carry,
and greatly impeded all offensive movements. Moreover,
though the horses had now bards on their heads and breasts,
they were still without protection from flank attack ; wounded
horses were worse than useless, for they made confusion worse
confounded, and mounted cavalry were at a great disadvantage
against archers posted behind cover. For these reasons, and
as the result of experience gained in the Scotch and French
wars, it had become customary for armies to act upon the
defensive whenever possible ; and also for knights and
men-at-arms to fight on foot. Time after time victories had
• The Yorkists used guns at St. Albans in 1455 ; and at this time they had
them at Ludlow. Rot. Parl. 38 Hen. VI. Vol. V. 347-8.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 23
been won by adopting- a crescent-shaped formation ; the
recessed centre formed of pikemen, assisted by dismounted
cavalry and knights ; and the advanced horns composed of
archers, concealed or posted behind obstacles. The heavily
armed men were able to arrest the onslaught of the enemy,
and the archers took advantage of this to gall their flanks and
rear with flights of arrows. Against the Scots these tactics
had succeeded at Dupplin Moor in 1332 (which was what the
lawyers call the " leading case "), at Halidon Hill in 1333, at
Neville's Cross in 1346, and at Homildon Hill in 1402. The
French had given way before them at Crecy in 1346, and at
Poictiers in 1356 ; and the Spaniards, to whom they were still
a novelty, at Navarette in 1357, and at Aljubarotta in 1385.+
The only way to meet them successfully was by resolutely
refusing to attack.
We should have expected that Audley, bearing these
considerations in mind, would have dismounted most of his
horsemen, and taken up a defensive position on the rising
ground to the South of the defile, posting archers on his right
flank opposite to Netherblore, and also in the curtilage of
Bloreheath mill, and a third body of them in the centre to
guard the lane that crosses the valley ; and that he would have
kept a mounted reserve to frustrate any unlooked-for move
on the part of the enemy, and to make a counter attack, or
take up the pursuit, in the event of his defence proving
successful. But we are not told that he did anything of the
kind ; he seems to have only thought of carrying out the orders
of his Royal mistress in the spirit in which they were given,
and of riding down and capturing his opponents.
Waurin, whose information came from a Yorkist source,
says that at daybreak Salisbury and his men could see their
adversaries behind a great overgrown hedge, with only the
tips of their pennons showing above it. From which it would
appear that the Yorkists, on emerging from the Rowney Wood
t See " The History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages," by Professor
C. W. Oman, a work to which the present writer is greatly indebted.
24 The Battle of Bloreheath.
on to Bloreheath, looked across the defile (which would be
hidden from their view) to the rising ground beyond it ; and
there saw their enemies screened by the hedge of the village
cornfields. Waurin also tells us of the overweening confidence
of Audley's men, and how cheaply they held their foes.
(B) Salisbury s Defensive Measures. Salisbury and his
army, on the other hand, were actuated rather by the patient
and phlegmatic temperament of their chief, the Duke of York.
They did not act rashly, but with prudence and resolution ;
and in their arrangements displayed much of the wisdom of
the serpent. Being greatly outnumbered, they felt no strong
confidence in the result ; but determined to sell their lives
dearly, and to adopt the defensive tactics which experience
had shown to be the best. Halting on the North side of the
defile, under the shelter of the Rowney Wood, they
dismounted and proceeded to fortify a position. In their
front was the slope, with the brook at the bottom of it ; and
on their left this afforded very complete protection, not
only because the brook banks were steep, but also on account
of the fences and ditches surrounding the mansion and lands
of Netherblore ; their flank resting upon the wood. Opposite
to their centre and left there seem to have been no artificial
obstacles, but only the slope and brook. In places the slope
was steep, almost precipitous ; but in others it was more
gradual, and at some distance from the brook, which ran
between low banks. And their right was very weak, being
unprotected and entirely " in the air." This part therefore
received special attention, as we learn from Waurin ; a laager
of carts and horses all fastened together was formed, stakes
were driven into the ground to protect their front, and their
rear was secured by an intrenchment. It is probable that the
right flank of the Yorkists was opposite to Bloreheath mill,
but out of bowshot from it, and a little to the West of Audley's
Cross.
The length of front which they had to cover was
something over half a mile, and their force would give them
The Battle of Bloreheath. 25
about five men to each yard of ground. It is likely that the
knights and men-at-arms would be posted in the centre, where
the ground was more flat, and where a lane crossed the defile.
They would of course be assisted by archers on their flanks
and wherever cover could be had or the ground was
favourable. The left of the position, being less vulnerable,
would require fewer men ; but the right, being weak, would
want every one that could be spared. We may suppose that
the line was divided into three sections, each under its own
commander, and each composed partly of spearmen and partly
of archers. Having completed their preparations, we are told
that they prostrated themselves on the ground, and worshipped
in the most humble and devout manner.
CHAPTER VII.
THE FIGHTING.
(A) Salisbury's Stratagem. Salisbury had some reason
to fear that the assault would not be made, or at any rate
pressed home; in short that the Lancastrians might adopt
the course which in recent years had been always taken by the
French in such cases, and decline to fight. Situated as he was
in a hostile country, outnumbered, and expecting to be
hemmed in by other forces which the Queen was assembling,
fearing also that supplies might fail, he could not afford to
wait indefinitely. He had to persuade his enemies to throw
aside caution, and make an attack, which the Lancastrians on
their part were ready enough to do. With this object in view,
Salisbury pretended to retreat in confusion. This movement
was probably confined to his centre, and did not extend to
his intrenched flanks ; and it did not proceed very far. His
pikemen retired just far enough to encourage their opponents
to come down into the defile, where they had rising ground
in front of them and the Yorkist archers on their flanks,* as
• The same trick was practised by the Yorkists at the Battle of Tewkesbury.
26 The Battle of Bloreheath.
well as in front of them. As soon as the Lancastrians were
seen to be fairly committed to the attack and charging down
into the valley, the Yorkists halted, turned about, and
prepared to hold their ground, probably returning to their
original position on the brink of the declivity as being the
most advantageous for them.
(B) Lancastrian Cavalry Charges. Waurin says that the
battle began with a furious discharge of arrows on both sides,
under cover of which Audley' st men attacked on horseback.
The arrows killed about 20 Yorkists, and many of the horses
in the laager, who probably acted as a screen to the men near
them. But the Lancastrians, being in the open and
unprotected, suffered much heavier loss, five or six hundred
men falling before they drew off out of range. They soon
however returned to the charge ; but were again repulsed with
a loss of a hundred men, while they only killed ten Yorkists
in return.
(c) Death of Audley. It would seem that in this second
cavalry charge Audley was killed. Tradition says that the
man who killed him was Sir Roger Kynaston of Stocks near
Ellesmere, a leading Shropshire Yorkist ; and that to
commemorate the event he added Audley's coat of arms to
his own.+
(D) Change of Command. Lord Dudley s Tactics. The
command then devolved upon Lord Dudley (misdescribed by
Waurin as the Seigneur de Beaumont§), who determined to
dismount his cavalry, to the number of four thousand or so,
and attack on foot. Then ensued a hand to hand tussle which
lasted more than half an hour ; the remainder of the
Lancastrian horsemen remaining mounted and giving no
assistance. And, upon the attack failing, a body of them
t Waurin calls the Lancastrian Commander the Duke of Exeter. He also says
that Warwick was with his father. Of course neither of them were
present. Exeter, though a strong Lancastrian, had married the Duke
of York's sister.
% Sir Roger was certainly with the Duke at Ludlow a few weeks later.
— Blakeway's " Sheriffs of Shropshire," p. 73.
§ John Viscount Beaumont was killed at Northampton in 1460.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 27
numbering five hundred joined the enemy and began
attacking their own side. This was the final disaster, the
Lancastrian resistance collapsed, and the Yorkists had only
to advance to complete the rout. Gregory says that the battle
lasted all the afternoon, from one o'clock till five, and that the
pursuit was continued till " seven at the bell in the morning."
(E) The Defeat and Losses. The loss of the Lancastrians
is estimated at two thousand four hundred dead,* and that of
the Yorkists at fifty-six.t The heavily-armoured knights and
esquires always had a difficulty in escaping after a reverse,
especially when righting dismounted ; and that was certainly
so on the present occasion. The flower of Audley's army was
either slain or captured on the field itself. Among the
prisoners were Lord Dudley, who was wounded, Sir Thomas
Fitton, and a dozen* other knights ; but their names are not
recorded.
(F) The Pursuit. The flight of the vanquished would
probably be towards Market Drayton, and would be hampered
by the river Tern. In summer this might be crossed at various
places, but the most convenient spot would be at Stafford's
(or Sheep-ford) Bridge. There is little doubt that there was
a bridge here in 1459, as there certainly was in 1476,§ built
by the Abbot of Combermere to give him ready access to his
two Granges, Shifford's and Broomhall. Two of the fields on
Shifford's Grange, near the river, have peculiar names — one is
called Deadman's Den. and the other Duke Langley's piece.
But whether they are in any way connected with the battle, I
am unable to say.
(G) Audleys Burial. Audley's burial took place at
Darley Abbey, close to his Derbyshire Manor house of
Markeaton : a monastery of which his Touchet ancestors had
been benefactors so early as the reign of Henry II. And
• This is the figure usually given. Waurin says about two thousand,
t This is Waurin's estimate, the only one that I have seen.
J According to Waurin.
§ A deed of that date, at Tunstall, mentions " pons de Shyfford." It was a
narrow horse-bridge, and was replaced by the present bridge about 1768.
28 The Battle of Bloreheath.
there can be little doubt that the other dead knights were
honourably interred by their friends. Insults to the dead had
not yet become customary.*
(H) Re-flections on the Battle. It is, of course, easy to be
wise after the event, and to say what ought to have been done
by people who are dead and can make no reply. But it does
seem reasonably certain that, had Audley managed his attack
better, the result of the battle would have been very different.
A portion of his large force might have made a demonstration
in front of the Yorkists, engaging their attention, and
preventing them from moving ; while the remainder, keeping
to the lower part of the heath and following the lane leading
to Mucclestone, might have crossed the Wemberton Brook and
worked round their exposed right flank. A charge upon their
rear, which might have been delivered with great impetus
down the sloping ground, would have brushed away any such
slight obstacles as they could have made in the time and with
the materials at their disposal ; their right would have been
crushed, and their whole line rolled up and destroyed.
CHAPTER VIII.
DANGEROUS SITUATION OF THE
VICTORS.
(A) Yorkists Exhausted and Scattered. After the battle
the victors had little time to trouble about the vanquished, and
were fully occupied with their own concerns. And indeed
their position was a critical one, as is testified by the
Chronicler Gregory. Had the Queen been able to send a
comparatively small force of fresh troops from Eccleshall, to
march through the woodlands and take them suddenly in rear,
the result must have been disastrous to them. Exhausted as
they were after their hard day, many of them scattered far
* The Duke of York's head was exposed, after his death, with a paper crown
on it, in 1460. The body of Richard III. was stripped naked and tied
to a horse, and so shown, after Bosworth, in 1485.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 29
and wide in the pursuit, and the remainder encumbered with
prisoners and wounded, they could not have offered a very
effective resistance. We know too that there was a force of
two thousand men in a position to make such an attack, if
its commander had been so minded.
(B) Doubtful Attitude of Lord Stanley. This army was
under Thomas Lord Stanley, who had great estates in
Lancashire and Cheshire.* We learn from the Bill of
Impeachment that he had sent his servant to the Queen,
promising to come in haste, and asking to be put in the
forefront of the battle. But he did not keep his word, and
remained for three days inactive at Newcastle. He also sent
his brother William+ to join Salisbury before the battle, and
wrote him a letter of congratulation after it. This is not at
all surprising when we remember that Salisbury was his
father-in-law ; but he wavered between his duty to his
Sovereign and his private feelings, and does not seem to have
been a man upon whom it was safe to rely.*
(c) The Forward Movement Covered by Another Ruse.
His situation being such, Salisbury had every reason for
pressing forward. He would wish first to follow up his beaten
foes and prevent them from rallying ; secondly, to reach
Market Drayton and obtain supplies and succour for his
wounded ; and thirdly, to exchange his precarious position
for a more secure one. Gregory says that he covered his
evacuation of Bloreheath by a clever ruse, deputing an Austin
friar to shoot guns all night " in the Park that was at the back
side of the field " ; and that in the morning nobody was found
in the Park except the friar.
(D) The Chapel and the Friar. With regard to the friar
and the Park, a curious point may be noted. It is well-known
* In Lancashire he had Lathom, and Liverpool ; in Cheshire he had Bidston,
Neston, and Dunham Massey.
t William had Holt Castle in Denbighshire, and Ridley in Cheshire.
t Lord Stanley was only 26 years old at this time. His father had recently
died, so that he had only lately succeeded to his responsibilities, and
had not had much experience.
30 The Battle of Bloreheath.
that there was a chapel, or oratory, in Tyrley, which is
mentioned in the Bishop's register so early as 1361 ; and was
still in existence in 1562, as is proved by the Court Rolls of
the Manor. There was also a chapelry tithe connected with
it, which still existed when the Tithe Commutation Act was
passed. But all memory of the site of this chapel has passed
away. In the middle of this quondam Park there is, however,
a field which bears the name of the " Chapel Field " ; and in
this field is an excrescence which seems to mark the site of
an ancient building, which is not accounted for in any of the
existing maps, one of which goes back to 1669. It seems
quite a natural inference that Tyrley Chapel stood here, and
that its guardian was the Austin friar who fired alarm guns on
the night of St. Tecla's Day.
In those early days, when gunpowder was still something
of a novelty, the firing of blank charges would have a more
alarming effect than it would now. And the plan seems to
have answered ; for Salisbury was able to collect his scattered
and wearied men, and transport them to a better position
without any molestation.
CHAPTER IX.
SALISBURY HILL.
(A) Salisbury's Camp. It is likely that, after the battle,
the tenants of Tyrley Manor came to pay their respects to the
uncle of their landlord, asked his protection, and placed their
local knowledge at his disposal. And it is evident that the
camping ground on Salisbury Hill was selected by someone
who knew the district ; for it would have been difficult to find
a better one. The hill has a flat top, large enough to provide
space for several thousand men ; and from it the ground slopes
in every direction, so that the camp would not be easily rushed.
At present there are a good many trees on it and round it ;
but in the 15th century it was bare heath, and stood in the
The Battle of Bloreheath. 31
middle of an open country, so that the view from it was
extensive and uninterrupted. It was well supplied with water,
having a spring near its summit, in addition to the river Tern
winding round its base. It was near to the town of Drayton,
with which it was probably connected by a bridge.* But it
lay on the South-west side of the town, with open country
behind it, so that its occupants could easily slip away towards
Ludlow whenever they desired. This they would wish to do,
and probably did, as soon as possible. The Bill of
Impeachment tells us that Salisbury was at Drayton on the
night after the battle, and also on the Monday morning ; and
that he knew that Lord Stanley was not coming to join him.
There was, therefore, nothing to detain him ; and we may
assume that, having despatched his two wounded sons
northwards, attended to his other injured men, and taken
what supplies he could get, he pushed on towards Ludlow
some time on Monday.
(B) His March to Ludlow. What route he took does not
seem to be recorded. He may have crossed the Severn at
Shrewsbury, where the Duke of York was very popular, and
where the bridge had been recently repaired.t or he may have
left the Wrekin on his right hand, and proceeded by Newport,
Shifnal, Bridgnorth, and Cleobury Mortimer.
CHAPTER X.
QUEEN MARGARET AT MUCCLESTONE.
Queen Margaret on Mucclestone Church Tower.
There is a local tradition that Queen Margaret rode from
Eccleshall to the scene of conflict, and was an eye-witness of
the battle ; that she viewed it from the tower of Mucclestone
Church ; that when the day was lost she fled, having first had
• There was a stone horse-bridge over the Tern at Walk-mill just below
Salisbury Hill. A will of 1553 has a bequest of money to repair it : so
it may well have been there in 1459.
t " Shrewsbury," by Thomas Auden (1906), p. no.
32 The Battle of Bloreheath.
her horse's shoes reversed so as to mislead any pursuers ; and
that the blacksmith who did this for her was named Skelhorn.*
At first sight this seems a most unlikely story. Mucclestone
Church is a mile and a-half from the field of battle, which is
now completely hidden from it by a plantation called the
" Folly." To get to it from Eccleshall, the Queen would have
had to cross the line of Salisbury's advance ; and supposing
her to have reached it in safety, she would have been in rear
of his army. In case the Yorkists had been driven back, they
might have retired by way of Mucclestone, cutting her off from
Eccleshall, and very possibly making her a prisoner.
But to these objections it may be answered, first, that the
plantation is comparatively modern, and that in 1459 the
ground on which it stands was open heath ; so that part, at
any rate, of the battlefield would at that time be visible from
the tower. Secondly, that it might have been possible, though
perhaps risky, to pass in rear of the Yorkist army after it had
established itself in its entrenchments and was awaiting attack.
Thirdly, that (as we are told by Waurin), the Lancastrians
expected to capture their adversaries with very little trouble
and loss to themselves ; so that the risk may not have appeared
to them at the time to be very great. It may be, also, that
the Queen was expecting further help from her friends in
Cheshire, and thought that she was quite safe in advancing
in that direction.
As to what became of her after the defeat of her army,
accounts differ. Leland says that she returned to Eccleshall,
where she remained under the protection of John Hales, the
Bishop of Lichfield and Lord of Eccleshall Castle. But
Canon Morris, a later authority, states that whilst flying from
the field to Chester she was captured by John Cleger, one of
Lord Stanley's servants, and spoiled of her jewels ; and that
whilst her baggage was being rifled she and her son escaped,
* Hinchliffe's " History of Barthomley." Skelhorn's lineal descendant was
blacksmith and parish clerk at Mucclestone in 1855.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 33
and succeeded in reaching Harlech Castle.t Canon Morris
does not give his authority for this story. If it is true, the
action of John Cleger is significant as to Lord Stanley's
leanings.
CHAPTER XI.
EVENTS AFTER THE BATTLE.
(A) The Rout of Ludford. The subsequent adventures
of the principal combatants can soon be related. Salisbury
effected his intended junction with York and Warwick at
Ludlow : but they remained inactive at their camp at Ludford,
while the King's army rapidly increased. And soon their
followers became demoralised, and obeyed the Royal
proclamation to disperse. This scattering of the Yorkist
forces was known as the " Rout of Ludford," and occurred on
13th October. For the time being the cause was lost, and
the leaders had to seek safety in flight. York escaped to
Ireland, where he had friends. Salisbury and Warwick with
young Edward Earl of March, after many adventures and a
hazardous voyage round Land's End, found refuge at Calais,
where they arrived just in the nick of time.
(B) The New Lord Audley Turns Yorkist. Not only
did they prevent Calais from falling into the hands of their
enemies, but they took captive Lord Audley's son and
successor, who was with the beseiging force. Strange as it
may seem, this Lord Audley forgave the Nevilles for the death
of his father and the slight that they had put upon his mother,
and became a devoted adherent of the cause of York.
(c) Salisbury's Death. Salisbury, was not with the army
that won the battle of Northampton in July 1460, having been
left behind to besiege the Tower of London, and to secure the
support of the city for the Yorkist cause. But in the following
December he was wounded and captured at the battle of
T History of Chester, p. 56.
34 The Battle of Bloreheath.
Wakefield, and afterwards beheaded. His remains subse-
quently received honourable burial at Bisham Abbey, near
Marlow. After his death his Yorkshire estates were plundered
by his Lancastrian nephews, Ralph, Earl of Westmorland, and
Thomas, his brother.
(D) Adventures of His Two Sons, John and Thomas.
Salisbury's two sons Sir John and Sir Thomas Neville were
wounded at Bloreheath, but were able to proceed northwards,
with their brother-in-law Sir Thomas Harrington, the day
after the battle. But at Tarporley they were captured by
young John Done (a youth of 17, whose father Sir John had
been killed in the battle), and committed prisoners to Chester
Castle. There they remained till 13th July following, when
in obedience to the King's order they were handed over to
Lord Stanley. The battle of Northampton had been fought
on 9th July, and the King was a prisoner and a puppet in the
hands of the Yorkists.* Thomas, like his father, lost his life
at Wakefield ; and John was killed with his brother Warwick
at Barnet in 1471. Harrington was slain at Wakefield.
(E) The Stanleys. After the campaign of Bloreheath,
the two Stanleys may be assumed to have given a general
support to the Yorkist cause, though they did not become
prominent during the next quarter of a century.t But in 1485
they were again obliged to make a difficult choice, and to
decide whether to side with Richard or Henry at the battle
of Bosworth. Richard thought that he could count upon
them, he having bestowed many favours upon Lord Stanley ;
and by way of additional security having detained his son,
George Lord Strange as a hostage. And, at the beginning
of the battle, both the Stanleys, with their united following
of eight thousand men, were ranged on his side. But in the
middle of the conflict they deserted him and joined Henry,
whose victory was thereby assured. And it was Lord Stanley
• This appears to be the true account. Vide Gregory's Chronicle and Canon
Morris' " History of Chester," p. 56. Mr. Brooke's account, founded
on Hall, Hollinshed, Baker, and Stow, differs somewhat.
t In 1459 Thomas the elder brother was only 26 years old.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 35
who proclaimed Henry King. What motives influenced them
does not seem to be quite certain. Their action may have
been taken entirely on public grounds, and from detestation
of Richard's conduct. But it must not be forgotten that Lord
Stanley was, and had been for many years,* the stepfather of
Henry, whose mother had married him as her third husband.
So that it is equally likely that private feeling had something
to do with it ; and that the influence of his living wife proved
stronger than his attachment to the relations of his former
one. For his services at Bosworth Lord Stanley was created
Earl of Derby, and he died a natural death in 1504.
William, the younger brother, who was knighted about
1465, was not so fortunate. After the battle of Bosworth he
had possessed himself of Richard's treasure chest, and by so
doing became the richest subject in the land. He lived at
Holt Castle, in Denbighshire, and had a roll of " old rents "§
amounting to £3,000 a year. He had also 40,000 marks of
ready money. He aspired to become Earl of Chester, which
annoyed King Henry, who also had his eye on Stanley's
wealth. In 1495 a charge of disloyalty was brought against
him ; and though it was not supported by much evidence, he
was brought to the block and all his property confiscated.*
(F) Lord Dudley. Turning now to the Lancastrians,
Lord Dudley, who was wounded and captured, may be
assumed to have recovered his liberty after the Rout of
Ludford. He received several honourable offices from King
Henry, and was made a Knight of the Garter. After the
accession of Edward IV. in 1461, he received a pardon and
grants of money, and was still actively employed in 1478.+
He died in 1482.1
t Lord Stanley was already married to the Countess of Richmond in the
year 1473. Rot. Parl. 13 Ed. IV. Vol. VI. 77.
§ " Old rents " were fixed early in the i4th century; and would be much below
the real value at the end of the i$th.
• Ormerod's Cheshire, Vol. II. 298.
t Ormerod, Vol. II. 596.
t Harwood's edition of "Erdeswick's Staffordshire," 329.
36 The Battle of B lore heath.
(G) Sir Thomas Fitton and Others. He and Sir Thomas
Fitton§ seem to have been the only survivors of eminence on
this side, the names of the other prisoners not having been
recorded. Earwaker, in his history of East Cheshire, gives a
list of Sir Thomas Fitton's contingent. They numbered
sixty-six in all, of whom no less than thirty-one were killed.
CHAPTER XII.
WAS THE BATTLE FRATRICIDAL?
GREAT stress has been laid by some writers upon the
fratricidal character of this battle. Michael Dray ton, in his
Polyolbion, song 22 (which was written in the reign of
James I., about 170 years after the battle) says that Dutton
fought against Dutton, Done against Done, Booth against
Booth, Leigh against Leigh, Venables against Venables,
Troutbeck against Troutbeck, Molineux against Molineux,
and Egerton against Egerton. And he adds : —
" O ! Cheshire, wer't thou mad, of thine own native gore
So much until this day thou never shed'st before."
On the other hand, Mr. Beamont, writing in 1850, says that
this is a poetic fable, and that all the Cheshire men died
fighting in the Queen's livery of the Silver Swan.
It may be worth while to consider whether there is any
truth in Drayton's charge, which is certainly much exaggerated.
We have seen that, so far as is at present known,
Salisbury's army consisted almost entirely of Yorkshiremen,
William Stanley being the only Cheshire person of importance
who was fighting in his ranks. Stanley's sister, Margaret,
married Sir William Troutbeck, and his sister, Elizabeth,
married Sir Richard Molineux ; and both these knights were
killed in the battle, fighting on the side of the Queen. There
is nothing to show that they crossed swords with their
§ Of Gawsworth, near Macclesfield.
The Battle of Bloreheath. 37
brother-in-law. On the other hand, his elder brother, Lord
Stanley, who, in addition to being brother-in-law of Troutbeck
and Molineux, was the son in-law of Salisbury, and was thus
intimately connected by marriage with both sides, showed
great disinclination to join either, and succeeded in holding
aloof.
On the whole it seems that Bloreheath was no worse in
this respect than most battles in our Civil Wars ; and that the
behaviour of the Cheshire gentry compares favourably with
that of the aristocracy in other counties, such for instance as
that of the Neville family in Yorkshire.
Appendix D gives a few notes as to the living descendants
of the heroes of the battle. It does not pretend to be
complete. To deal with the subject exhaustively would be
a very large undertaking, and far beyond the scope of this
little book.
XI.
APPENDIX A.
WILLIAM GREGORY'S CHRONICLE, CAMDEN SOCIETY, 1876,
VOL. XVII., N.S., 204.
" AND thys yere was done a grate jornaye at the Blowre Hethe by
the Erie of Saulysbury ande the Quenys galentys. And that day
the Kynge made VII Knyghtys, fyrste, Syr Robert Molyners, Syr
John Daune, Syr Thomas Uttyng, Syr John Brembly, Syr John
Stanley, Syr John Grysly, and Syr Rychard Harden; and V of
thes Knyghtys were slayne fulle manly in the fylde, and many of
the yemonry sore hurte, and a fulle nobylle Knyght, the Lord
Audeley, and Syr Thomas Hamdon, Knyght, was the getynge of
the fylde, and Thomas Squyer and Counteroller of the Pryncys
house fulle sore hurte. And (the) batayle or jornay lastyd all the
aftyr none, fro one of the clock tyll V aftyr non, and the chasse
lastyd unto VII at the belle in the mornynge. And men were
maymyd many one in the Quenys party. There were in the
Quenys party V Mi., and in the othyr party V C, a grete wondyr
that ever they myght stonde the grete multytude, not ferynge, the
Kynge being with yn X myle and the Quene with yn V myle at
the Castelle of Egyllyssalle. But the Erie of Saulysbury hadde
been i-take, save only a Fryer Austyn schot gonnys alle that nyght
in a parke that was at the back syde of the fylde, and by thys
mene the Erie come to Duke of Yorke. And in the morowe they
found nothyr man ne chylde in that parke but the fryer, and he
sayde that for fere he abode in that parke alle that nyght. But
in the mornyng, bytwyne the fylde and Chester, Syr John Dawne
ys sone* that was at home in his fadyr's place hadde worde that
hys fadyr was slayne; a-non he raysyd hys tenantys and toke
by-syde a lytyl towne i-namyd Torperlay Syr Thomas Nevyle, Syr
John Nevyle, and Syr Thomas Haryngdon, and brought hem unto
the Castelle of Chester, ande there they a-boode tylle the batayle
of Northehampton was done."
Note. — Gregory is not to be trusted as regards the
numbers. Five hundred is too small a figure to give for
the Yorkists; and also five thousand and fifty for the
Lancastrians. But the disparity of numbers, which must
have existed, is clearly brought out. The Queen, at
* John Done was 17 years old when his father died.
Ml.
Eccleshall, was about ten miles distant, not five. The
King was at Coleshill, in Warwickshire, about fifty miles
away. I have not been able to identify all the knights
mentioned. Molineux and Done are clear enough,
Brembly was probably Bromley, and Grysly Gresley ; but
Utting, Stanley, Harden, and Hamdon are obscure.
Thomas, the Controller of the Prince's household, is also
a difficulty. He could hardly have been Sir Thomas
Fitton, who was not much in favour at Court before the
battle.
APPENDIX B.
CHRONICLES OF GREAT BRITAIN BY JEHAN DE WAURIN.
ROLLS SERIES (1891). VOL. 39, pp. 269 and 319.
Page 269. " Lors le due d'Yorc oiant ces responces, et
sentant quil nestoit pas fort assez pour combattre le roy, il se party
dillec si sen alia a Yrlande, et son filz Edouard Comte de la
Marche, avec luy les Comtes de Salsebery et de Warewic se
misrent en mer et vindrent a Callaix: mais sachies avant que les
Comtes dessusdis se departissent du due d'Yorc pour aller vers
la mer ilz recontrerent une armee des gens de lo royne dont
estoit Capittaine le Seigneur d'Andelay si les combatirent et
descomfirent, sicque ilz y morurent ledit Capittaine, les Seigneurs
de Charinten et de Kindreton, et y furent prins le baron de
Duclay et messire Thomas Fiderne, combien que les gens du due
nestoient que quatre cens combatans et ceulz de la royne estoient
bien six ou huit mille. Aprez ladite adventure la royne
d'Angleterre, de ce moult troublec, fist ses complaintes auz grans
seigneurs du conseil du roy, lesquelz lui promisrent tous que pour
vengier ceste honte chascun deulz senforceroit de le servir."
Note. — This account of the battle comes out of the
chronological order in Waurin's book, and makes it
appear to have taken place in 1457. Andelay is evidently
Audley, Duclay Dudley, and Fiderne Fitton. The Lord
of Kinderton was Sir Hugh Venables; but who
Charinten was is not clear. There were Cheshire Lords
of Carington and Carincham; but neither of these was
killed at Bloreheath
xin.
Page j/p. After describing the popularity of Warwick, he
goes on: — "Lequel lors favorisoit le due d'Yorc et sa bende,
qui ayant comme dit est la charge de son armee, adcompaignie de
environ vingt chincq chevalliers et de six a sept mille hommes
deffensables, entre lesquelz navoit pas quarante hommes darmes
vint a lencontre du due d'Excestre, si se recontrerent les deux
compaignies a Blouher prez dune forest entre la ducie d'Yorc et
la Comte Derby. Quant le Comte de Salsbery, le Comte de
Warewic et leurs gens aparcheurent droit a ung point de jour
larmee d'Excestre et due Seigneur de Beaumont derriere une grant
forest haye, dont on ne veiot que les boutz des penons, ilz se
misrent a pie a larriere dune forest qui leur faisoit cloture a ung
coste, et de lautre avoient mis leur charroy et leur chevaulz lyez les
ungz auz autres, et par derriere eulz avoient fait ung bon trenchis
pour sceurete, et devant eulz avoient fichie leur peux a la fachon
d'Angleterre ; et lors quilz se furent mis en ordonnance de bataille,
se vindrent rengier devant eulz larmee d'Excestre tous a cheval,
et faisoient bien leur conte datraper Warewic et avoir sa
compaigine a grant marchie, a pou de traveil et dangier. Lesquelz
de Warewic et sa routte aprez eulz estre confessez et mis en etat de
morir, baiserent tous la terre sur quoy ilz marchoient, de laquele
ilz mengerent, concluant que sur y celle ilz morroient et viveroient :
et quant les dis Seigneurs d'Excestre et de Beaumont se veyrent
si prez de leurs annemis quilz peuvent employer leur trait ilz se
prindrent si onniement a tirer que cestoit horreur, et si radement
que partout ou il ataindoit satachoit telement quilz tuerent moult
de chevaulz et environ vingt on vingt deux hommes de la
compaignie du dit Warewic, et de la compaignie d'Excestre
bien de chincq a six cens. Pourquoy ledis d'Excestre
demarcherent en recullant environ le trait dun archier, mais pou
aprez renchargerent impetueusement sur ledis de Warewic a laquele
rencharge moururent, de ceulz d'Excestre environ cent, et des
Warewic dix. Alors le Seigneur de Beaumont et sa compaignie,
considerans que peu a leur honnour et ancores moins a la prouffit
exploitoient a cheval, se misrent a pie environ quatre mille hommes
qui se vindrent joindre a la bataille de Warewic ou ilz combatirent
main a main bien une grande demye heure, esperans quilz serroient
XIV.
comfortez de leur gens a cheval, lesquelz advisans la resistance
quon faisoit a leur gens de pie prindrent le large des champz si
laisserent ceulz de pie convenir a leur entreprinse, parquoy ung
cheval lier de la routte du Seigneur de Beaumont quy avoit desoubz
lui environ chincq cens hommes ce prinst a cryer avec les siens
' Warewic, Warewic ! ' et fraper sur la compaignie dudit de
Beaumont pourquoy ilz demarcherent ancores en recullant : et lors
Warewic parchevant ceste chose crya quon marchast avant, ce
qui fut fait, et finablement, furent le Comte de Beaumont et les
siens descomfis, si en morut a ceste besongne par le raport des
heraulz environ deux mille hommes et de ceulz de Warewic
chincquante six, et y furent prins ledit Comte de Beaumont, le
Seigneur de Welles et douze autres chevalliers, et le demourant
sen fuyrent; laquele bataille fut ou mois de Septembre trois ou
quatre jours avant la feste de St. Michiel."
Note. — This interesting and circumstantial account
contains some obvious errors. Bloreheath is not on the
borders of Yorkshire and Derbyshire. Warwick was not
present with his father, Salisbury; nor were Exeter and
Beaumont and Welles fighting on the other side. For
Exeter we may substitute Audley, and for Beaumont
Dudley.
APPENDIX C.
THE OLD ROADS OVER BLOREHEATH, WHICH WERE SUPERSEDED BY
NEW ONES LAID OUT UNDER THE POWERS GIVEN BY THE
TURNPIKE ACT OF 1768 (9 GEORGE III. 55), AND THE ACT
FOR INCLOSING BLOREHEATH (PASSED IN 1773, AND ACTED
UPON IN 1775).
1. The Main Road Leading from the Loggerheads to
Shi-fford's Bridge. In the year 1587 the Manor of Tyrley was
divided into three parts of equal value, one of which was allotted
to Sir Gilbert Gerard, one to Alice widow of Reginald Corbet,
and the other to James Skrymsher, they being the persons who
were each entitled to an undivided third part of it. This partition
XV.
was effected by a writ issued by the Sheriff, in which the various
parcels are fully set out.* The site of the present Rowney farm
was then occupied by a wood called the Little Rowney; and
through this wood the road passed, coming out on to Bloreheath
near the boundary between the Rowney and Blore Hall farms.
To Sir Gilbert Gerard was awarded by the writ the Easternmost
portion of the heath, and his Eastern boundary against Blore Hall,
or Netherblore, was " along the road leading to Drayton as far
as a certain place called Hales Dale." Hales Dale is, of course,
the valley of the Wemberton Brook; and the name was given to
it to distinguish it from the more Northern valley, called Blore
Dale.t It is clear, therefore, that the old road to Drayton ran
along the Eastern edge of the heath as far as the Wemberton
Brook. From the point where it came to the brook, a road led
on in a Southerly direction, up the hill to Blore village. But the
road to Drayton made a sharp turn to the light, and followed the
brook down as far as Bloreheath mill pool; where it crossed the
brook, and followed more or less the line of the present main
road down to its junction with the road leading from Mucclestone
to Market Drayton. I
From this point it kept to its present line, forming the
Southern boundary of Shifford's Grange, as it did in the thirteenth
century. §
There is not much to be seen of the old road along the
Wemberton Brook; the brook has been diverted, and the ground
levelled, for irrigation purposes. And I think that between 1768
and 1838, when the tithe map was made, the dam of the mill pool
was raised, and the pool enlarged so as almost to cover the site
of the old road. The road must have gone along the North side
of the pool, crossing the brook just below it. But the entrance
to the mill seems to have been on the other side of the valley,
where a depression marks the line of the lane that led to it.
* There are two originals of this document, one in Latin and one in English,
at Tunstall, neither quite perfect. There is an early copy at Oakley.
t It was not a good name, being likely to be confused with the " Lloyd
Drumble " which is much nearer to Hales ; and is now quite disused.
t Direct proof is wanting ; but it mus.t have been so, unless we are to
suppose that the traffic went all the way round by Blore village.
§ Charter of 1447, quoting an earlier one of about 1295, at Tunstall.
XVI.
The old road, therefore, made a considerable bend; and we
can well believe that in 1768 it was found to be " deep and
ruinous," and also " narrow and incommodious," to adopt the
wording of the Act of Parliament.
The obvious remedy was to divert the road and make a new
and direct one across the waste of Bloreheath, which would cut
off the bend. And accordingly the Act provided that a road forty
feet wide might be made, and that no compensation should be
paid to the owners of the waste land. The Inclosure Act gave
power to increase the width of the road from forty feet to sixty.
And in this way the present straight road across Bloreheath came
into being, and the steep banks below the mill were cut down
and the hollow between them filled up. A large gravel pit was
also opened at this point, for the reparation of the roads of the
parish.
The Act of 1768 also provided for the erection of a cart
bridge over the Tern, instead of the ancient narrow horse bridge.
This bridge still remains; but the approaches to it have been
straightened and improved, so that it now makes an awkward
angle, and is not in a true line with the road.
2. The Mucclestone Lane. This is referred to in the Writ
of Partition, where it is called the " Common lane." At that
time it ran through open heath land all the way from Sandy Lane
to the Mucclestone boundary, and had no fence on either side
of it. Its line does not seem to have been much altered.
3. The Road which Crosses the Main Road Below Bloreheath
Mill. This was set out by the Commissioners appointed under
the Inclosure Act of 1773. The Northern portion of it follows
the boundary line between the Skrymsher and Corbet shares of
Bloreheath. The Southern portion leads straight to the point
from which roads diverge, to Blore and Hales respectively.
4. The Straight Drive to Oakley from the Mucclestone Lane.
This passes over the North-western portion of Bloreheath, and
was made about the year 1714. This piece of land was bought
by Sir John Chetwode from William Church (whose ancestor had
purchased it from the Corbets) in February, 1713-4 ; and the new
xvn.
road across it is shown on the Oakley estate map of 1715. The
old road seems to have followed the Wemberton Brook down from
Bloreheath Mill, past Daisey Lake, and to have come out into
the present back road to Oakley Hall.
5. The Road up the Wemberton Brook Valley past
Netherblore. There seems to have been a road up this valley,
from Bloreheath Mill to Netherblore, which there divided. One
road kept to the right, past the " Cold Comfort " farm, and
through the woods to Fair Oak and Eccleshall. This road can
be easily traced. The other road, or track, which branched off
to the left at Netherblore, followed the line of a watercourse
dividing the Little Rowney Wood from the Great Rowney, and
led into the road from Drayton to Newcastle, a little below the
Loggerheads Inn. The line of this road is marked by an existing
footpath. The ground over which it goes is rather stiff and
low-lying; and the route was less convenient than the alternative
one across the dry gravelly land of Bloreheath. But, in the days
when robbers abounded and travellers liked to be unobtrusive, it
had the merit of being well-screened from observation.
6. The Lane from Blore Village to Sandy Lane. This is still
the road from Blore to the corner of the road leading to Hales.
The Western part of it, which has been superseded by the newer
road leading to Bloreheath Mill, used to go straight on past two
cottages, which still remain; and it joined the main road between
Sandy lane and Bloreheath Mill, near where the new Bloreheath
farm stands. Part of the old lane still remains, but some of it
has been thrown into the adjoining fields.
7. Footpath from Blore to Mucclestone. The Court Rolls of
the Manor tell us that the existing footpath across Netherblore
and Bloreheath towards Mucclestone is ancient, and was for the
convenience of persons attending Mucclestone Church. The entry
relating to it is dated 27th March, 1553.
XV111.
APPENDIX D.
XOTES ON THE LIVING DESCENDANTS OF THE KNIGHTS AND
GENTRY WHO FOUGHT AT BLOREHEATH.
1. Descendants of the Earl of Salisbury. There do not
seem to be any in the male line. The Stanleys of Knowsley,
are descended from his daughter Eleanor. He had five other
daughters, who may possibly have living representatives.
The Marquis of Abergavenny is descended from Edward
Neville, Salisbury's brother ; and various families can claim descent
from his sisters. His sister Eleanor (by her second husband,
Henry Percy Earl of Northumberland, son of Hotspur who was
killed at Shrewsbury in 1403), is the ancestress of the Dukes of
Northumberland. This Eleanor, through her daughter Katherine,
has for descendants the Earl of Wilton, the Egertons of Oulton,
the Warburtons of Arley, the Wilbrahams of Rode, the Corbets of
Adderley, the Tarletons of Breakspears, and other allied families.
Another sister, Cecily Duchess of York, has, through her
elder daughter Anne Duchess of Exeter, numerous descendants,
whose pedigrees have been worked out by the writers on Royal
descents.
2. Descendants of Sir John Conyers. Sir John is at present
represented by the Countess of Yarborough, who is Baroness
Conyers in her own right; and her sister the Countess of Powis.
3. Descendants of Sir William Stanley. It does not appear
that Sir William Stanley has any living descendants. He had a
son William, who married the heiress of Tatton, Joan daughter
of Sir Geoffrey Massv. They had a daughter and heiress named
Joan, who married Sir Richard Brereton. The grandson of these
latter, another Richard Brereton, died childless in 1598, and
settled Tatton upon Sir Thomas Egerton, the Lord Chancellor,
whose descendants still hold it.
The Stanleys of Alderley are descended from Sir William's
younger brother, John.
XIX.
4. Issue of Lord Audley. Lord Audley has numerous
descendants. The peerage continued in direct male descent until
1777; and on the death of the eighteenth baron it passed to his
sister's son George Thicknesse, who took the name of Touchet.
At present the barony is in abeyance between two co-heiresses,
the Hon. Mary and the Hon. Emily Thicknesse Touchet, who are
both unmarried and live in Hampshire.
But the local connection of the family with Staffordshire,
Cheshire, and Shropshire was severed in the 16th century. The
son of the Lord Audley who turned Yorkist and fought against
his father's friends, rebelled against Henry VII., was captured
at Blackheath in 1497, and beheaded on Tower Hill. His son
was restored in blood; but the family fortunes declined. The
Manor of Buglawton was surrendered to the Crown in 1535.*
Newhall was alienated also in the reign of Henry VIII. t The
Manor of Hawkstone was held by Sir Rowland Hill in 1559; so
it would seem that Red Castle had gone from the Audleys before
that date.* And Harwood§ says that Audley was sold to Sir
Gilbert Gerard in 1577,11 by George Lord Audley, who was
created Earl of Castlehaven in 1617. The last Earl of Castlehaven
died in 1777, when the old barony of Audley passed, as already
said, to George Thicknesse. This is an old Staffordshire name,
connected with Audley and the neighbouring township of Balterley
from very early times till 1790, when Ralph Thicknesse sold
Balterley Hall. The family held land in Tunstall (near Market
Drayton), and Tyrley, between 1387 and 1586. T
Sir Philip Walhouse Chetwode represents the Touchets of
Nether Whitley, co. Chester, his ancestor Philip Chetwode of
Oakley having married Hester Touchet the heiress of that family,
in 1664. Sir Philip is not, so far as I know, lineally descended
• Ormerod's Cheshire, Vol. III. 41.
t Lysons, Magna Britannia, Vol. II. Part II. p. 478.
% There is an early copy of the settlement of his large estates upon his
relatives, made by Sir Rowland at this time, amongst the papers at
Tunstall. He settled Hawkstone upon his cousin Humphrey Hill of
Adderley in fee.
§ P. 99-
II This is corroborated by a Court Roll of that Manor at Aqualate, dated
1586. Sir Gilbert was then lord of the Manor.
IT Deeds at Tunstall.
XX.
from Lord And ley, but from his cousin and contemporary Thomas
Touch et.
Many local families can claim descent from Lord Audley
through females. His daughter Annet married Hugh Done of
Oulton, and was an ancestress of the Egertons of Oulton, and of
the families connected with them.
Anne Touchet, sister of the Lord Audley who sold Audley
and became Earl of Castlehaven, married Thomas Brooke, of
Norton Priory co. Chester ; and from her are descended the
present Sir Richard Brooke of Norton, and collateral branches of
his family, and also the Wilbrahams of Delamere, Lathom, and
Rode, who have several times intermarried with the Brookes.
5. Sir Hugh de Venables, Baron of Kinderton, left no
descendants, being succeeded in his property by a cousin who was
his heir.
6. Sir Robert del Booth, of Dunham, is represented by the
Earl of Stamford and Warrington. The Chetwodes, Colonel
Cotes of Pitchford, the Bougheys of Aqualate, and Mr. Brooke
of Haughton, are also descended from him in the female line.
7. Sir Thomas Dutton of Dutton, has no living descendants.
Ormerod i., 649.
8. Sir John Egerton was the ancestor of the Egertons of
Oulton, and grandfather of the Sir John Egerton who married
Elizabeth Done, the grand-daughter of James Lord Audley.
9. Sir John Legh, of Knutsford Booths, had descendants.
The male line came to an end about 1700, Ruth, the heiress,
marrying Thomas Pennington. Their issue Mill survives. Ormerod
i., 500.
10. Sir Richard Molynenx was the ancester of the Earls of
Sefton.
* Her first husband was Sir Thomas Dutton, killed at Bloreheath.
XXI.
11. Sir William Troulbeck of Dunham-on-the-Hill,§ left a
great-grand-daughter and heiress, who married Sir John Talhot,
ancestor of the Earls of Shrewsbury. Ormerod ii., 42.
12. Sir Thomas Fitton of Gawsworth, had no children, and
was succeeded by his brother. The Fittons are now extinct in the
male line, and Gawsworth belongs to the Earl of Harrington, who
can claim descent from them through females (Earwaker's " East
Cheshire," vol. ii., 567).
§ Described in the Herald's Visitation pedigree of 1589 as of Prynes Castle
in Wirral.
FROM THE PRESS OF
WHITEHEAD BROS.
ST. JOHN'S SQUARE,
WOLVERHAMPTON.
DA Twemlow, Francis Handle
250 The battle of Bloreheath
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11